SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
For John Dulac, analyst at the International Energy Agency's (IEA) Sustainable Energy Policy and Technology directorate, retrofits represent an essential part of reducing Europe's energy consumption.
"Deep energy retrofits of the existing building stock are critical to meeting a sustainable, cost-effective, low-carbon pathway for the European building sector," he says.
Dulac estimates that around 70 percent of Europe's building stock in 2050 will be composed of buildings that already exist today.
"Even if you're building hundreds of thousand of these passive-style [energy efficient] new buildings, when you're talking about 225 million existing households, it's peanuts, it's nowhere near where we need to be," he says. "So there really needs to be a drive of taking these new technologies for new constructions and translating them to low-cost technologies for existing buildings."
Dulac says that the technologies that need to be applied to existing buildings in terms of insulation, air sealing and low-emissivity, double-pane windows are typically readily available in most markets in Europe for new construction and are often highly cost effective.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Saturday December 05 2015, @07:40PM
Wait, you seem to be mixing and matching numbers from single pane (which, unfortunately are still quite common in the US) with those of double and triple pane. You've totally glossed over the cost issue.
Going to triple pane is usually not cost effective vs going to Double Pane.
In cold regions, such as New England, triple-glazed windows can save 2 to 3 percent of your heating bill, compared with double-glazed windows. From a cost standpoint, it'll take a few decades to recoup the 10 to 15 percent upcharge to go from low-e double-glazed windows to triple-glazed. For example, if you pay $1,000 per year in energy bills, have 20 windows in your house, and 22 percent of your energy is lost through your windows (which is average), then each window is losing $11 worth of energy per year. A triple-glazed window will reduce that loss by about $1, so it'll take 35 years to cover a $35 upcharge for triple-glazing.
See [familyhandyman.com]
If you spend that extra money replacing failed double pane (fogged) you will save a lot more.
New construction or broken window replacement? It probably pays. Arbitrarily replacing: You will never recoop.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.